In a dramatic legal move, acclaimed author Michael Wolff has initiated an unprecedented lawsuit against First Lady Melania Trump, asserting his right to free speech against her alleged $1 billion defamation threat. This clash not only highlights the growing importance of anti-SLAPP legislation but also intensifies public scrutiny on the Trump family’s long-standing connections to the notorious Jeffrey Epstein.
Author Michael Wolff has filed a lawsuit against First Lady Melania Trump, claiming she threatened him with a $1 billion lawsuit if he did not retract statements related to Jeffrey Epstein. The lawsuit, filed on October 22, 2025, in state supreme court in Manhattan, seeks unspecified damages and aims to use the legal process to put Melania and Donald Trump under oath to answer questions about their connections to the deceased financier.
Melania Trump’s Defense and the Alleged Defamation
The lawsuit by Wolff comes in response to a letter from Melania Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, dated October 15, which demanded a retraction, an apology, and damages, threatening a $1 billion suit if Wolff failed to comply. Brito alleged that Wolff’s statements caused his client “overwhelming reputational and financial harm” through “false, defamatory, and lewd statements,” including “extremely salacious” allegations about Epstein.
A spokesperson for Melania Trump, Nicholas Clemens, issued a statement asserting, “First Lady Melania Trump is proud to continue standing up to those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.” This position reflects Trump’s consistent pattern of aggressively challenging reports her lawyers deem false, as detailed by NBC News.
Wolff’s Fight for Free Speech and Anti-SLAPP Protection
Wolff’s lawsuit characterizes Melania Trump’s threats as an attempt to silence free speech and intimidate critics. He claims that the Trumps “have made a practice of threatening those who speak against them” with costly legal actions “to silence their speech, to intimidate their critics generally, and to extract unjustified payments and north korean style confessions and apologies.”
Crucially, Wolff is utilizing New York’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) laws. These statutes are designed to protect individuals from frivolous lawsuits intended to stifle public discussion or journalism. Wolff stated that bringing the case was a “difficult decision,” but emphasized his role as a journalist for 40 years, noting, “Mrs. Trump’s threatened lawsuit is what lawyers call a strategic lawsuit against public participation, a SLAPP suit. Its purpose was to intimidate and silence me, as Donald Trump has done to so many news organizations and reporters.”
He added that New York’s anti-SLAPP law protects people sued for making statements involving matters of public concern, allowing him to initiate action rather than have threats “hanging over my head indefinitely.”
The Epstein Connection: A Central Focus of the Lawsuit
At the heart of Wolff’s legal challenge are claims related to Jeffrey Epstein. The lawsuit alleges that the Trumps’ threats are also “intended to shut down legitimate inquiry into the Epstein matter.” Wolff’s statements, made to “The Daily Beast” and in social media videos, included claims that Melania Trump was “very involved” in Epstein’s social circle, where she allegedly met Donald Trump, and that Donald Trump first slept with Melania Trump on Epstein’s private jet.
The lawsuit clarifies that Wolff never accused Melania Trump of involvement in any of Epstein’s crimes. Instead, it asserts the public’s right to question her role in the Epstein story and to “find out what happened in Mr. Trump’s and Epstein’s 10 years of pursuing models.” Wolff stated he has “accrued many hours of interviews of Jeffrey Epstein conducted over several years,” indicating a deep investigation into the matter.
Wolff’s Quest for Testimony Under Oath
A key objective of Wolff’s lawsuit is to depose both Melania and Donald Trump under oath. “As a reporter, I’ve never had the opportunity to ask someone questions when their answers have to be given under an oath and in the presence of a court reporter,” Wolff said, expressing his eagerness to delve into their relationship with Epstein. This legal maneuver could provide unprecedented insight into a highly scrutinized aspect of the Trump family’s history.
The Daily Beast Retraction and Broader Context
Some of Wolff’s claims stemmed from an appearance on “The Daily Beast’s” podcast “Inside Trump’s Head,” which led to an article headlined “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author.” However, “The Daily Beast” later retracted the article and a portion of the podcast episode, issuing an apology stating that “upon reflection, we have determined that the article did not meet our standards and has therefore been removed from our platforms.” The full editor’s note regarding this removal is available on The Daily Beast’s website.
Despite the retraction, Wolff’s lawsuit argues that some statements were incomplete phrases taken out of context, while others, such as calling the Trumps’ marriage a “sham marriage, trophy marriage,” were “fair and justified” statements of opinion, protected under free speech.
Donald Trump has frequently disparaged Wolff, calling him a “third-rate reporter” and dismissing his books as “total fake job.” Wolff is known for his four bestselling, controversial books about the former president, including “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” His new book, “The Art of Her Deal: The Untold Story of Melania Trump (Redux),” is expected to delve deeper into these subjects.
Long-Term Implications: Free Speech, Transparency, and Public Scrutiny
This lawsuit represents a significant moment in the ongoing national conversation about free speech, public accountability, and the limits of power. By invoking anti-SLAPP laws, Wolff is challenging a powerful figure’s ability to use legal threats to suppress information and criticism. The outcome could set a precedent for journalists and authors covering high-profile individuals.
Moreover, the case promises to reignite public interest and inquiry into the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. With Wolff’s explicit goal of questioning the Trumps under oath, the lawsuit aims to pierce through the veil of secrecy that has often surrounded the connections between political elites and the disgraced financier. This legal battle is not merely about defamation; it is about the right to ask difficult questions and the public’s demand for transparency in matters of significant public concern.
